linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] net: fix race in the receive/select

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0906261018580.16400@makko.or.mcafeemobile.com>
Date:	Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:32:17 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	fbl@...hat.com, nhorman@...hat.com, davem@...hat.com,
	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: fix race in the receive/select

On Fri, 26 Jun 2009, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> And if we remove waitqueue_active() in xxx_update(), then lock/unlock is
> not needed too.
>
> If xxx_poll() takes q->lock first, it can safely miss the changes in ->status
> and schedule(): xxx_update() will take q->lock, notice the sleeper and wake
> it up (ok, it will set ->triggered but this doesn't matter).
> 
> If xxx_update() takes q->lock first, xxx_poll() must see the changes in
> status after poll_wait()->unlock(&q->lock) (in fact, after lock, not unlock).

Sure. The snippet above was just to show what typically the code does, not 
a suggestion on how to solve the socket case.
But yeah, the problem in this case is the waitqueue_active() call. Without 
that, the wait queue lock/unlock in poll_wait() and the one in wake_up() 
guarantees the necessary barriers.
Some might argue the costs of the lock/unlock of q->lock, and wonder if 
MBs are a more efficient solution. This is something I'm not going into.
To me, it just looked not right having cross-matching MB in different 
subsystems.

- Davide

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/